Ed board charter change divides voters

Linda Conner Lambeck and Brian Lockhart

Updated 12:30 pm, Monday, November 5, 2012

A rally was held outside the Margaret Morton Center to protest against a proposed charter change that would put control of the school board in the hands of the mayor, along Broad Street in Bridgeport, Conn. on Thursday November 1, 2012.
Photo: Christian Abraham

Ralph Ford, 139th District Leader, speaks durnig a rally which was held outside the Margaret Morton Center to protest against a proposed charter change that would put control of the school board in the hands of the mayor, along Broad Street in Bridgeport, Conn. on Thursday November 1, 2012.
Photo: Christian Abraham

Cecelia Clemons, right, cheers as she attends a rally which was held outside the Margaret Morton Center to protest against a proposed charter change that would put control of the school board in the hands of the mayor, along Broad Street in Bridgeport, Conn. on Thursday November 1, 2012.
Photo: Christian Abraham

More Information

The ballot question
Shall the City of Bridgeport approve and adopt the Charter Change as recommended by the Charter Revision Commission and approved by the City Council, including education governance reforms?
The options
A 'yes' vote will mean the phase-in of a nine-member board appointed by the mayor as elected terms expire. Five would be appointed in December 2013 and four in December 2015.
A 'no' vote means that the elected board will stay in place.
If approved:
The new board will be in full effect on Dec. 1, 2015, following phase-out of current elected members. The board members will be subject to special rules and restrictions, and would have to meet qualifications. Each appointee would receive training in how to be a board member at the start of their term. Interference by individual board members with the day-to-day performance of the superintendent of schools would violate the charter.

Page 1 of 1

BRIDGEPORT -- A contentious bid to convert the city school board from an elected one to one appointed by the mayor -- blasted by critics as a vote-robbing power grab but hailed by others as the best chance to rescue a failing district -- will likely have no effect on student performance, according to a national expert on education policy.

The charter question being weighed by city voters on Tuesday is an enabler that is more likely to boost cooperation than test scores, said Joseph P. Viteritti, a professor at Hunter College who advised Mayor Michael Bloomberg on New York City schools.

"What mayoral control does is allow changes to happen more easily than under a system where the board is elected," said Viteritti, adding that there is no link between mayoral control and student performance -- one of the arguments made by opponents of an appointed board.

But Democratic Mayor Bill Finch insists he wants an appointed board to take the politics out of running the beleaguered district, which even he admits is at the bottom of Connecticut's public school barrel.

The city got a taste of having an appointed board in 2011 after Finch and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy orchestrated a state takeover of what some saw as a dysfunctional elected body. But that was overturned by the state Supreme Court in February, necessitating the charter change.

"We have the worst schools in the state of Connecticut -- some of the worst in New England," Finch said. "We need to fix it. So if you look at what we've done in the last 10 months with an appointed board, we've got kids going to college in their senior year, 150 more preschool slots, kids with brand new textbooks throughout the system."

Republicans and other critics see the move -- well financed by generous donations from United Illuminating, Bridgeport and St. Vincent's hospitals and even Mayor Bloomberg -- as just a rattled Democratic Town Committee-led effort to maintain control over patronage jobs, lucrative contracts and the district's $224 million operating budget.

John Slater, chairman of the Bridgeport Republicans, said Democrats have been in charge for 30 years and "look at the results."

So, Slater asked, why reward them with more power?

"I don't understand what the mayor is thinking," Slater said. "If he thinks people in Bridgeport are smart enough to vote for president, senator, a congressperson, mayor and city council, what makes the people of Bridgeport not smart enough to choose their own Board of Education?"

Slater said that changing the charter will just turn the school board into another "jobs program" for Finch and the Democratic machine.

Finch said that has not happened in other districts where there is mayoral control.

"The mayors control their school boards," Finch said. "They control their school systems and they're held accountable for getting kids into the middle class. Our schools (are) not getting kids into the middle class."

The battle over the issue has escalated to the size of a municipal campaign, complete with door-knocking, house parties, glossy mailers and even paid polling.

Finance reports filed by Residents for a Better Bridgeport, a charter change proponent, with the Bridgeport Town Clerk offer a glimpse at the big money being poured into swaying voters.

Top donors to Finch's effort include corporate entities eager to stay in favor with Bridgeport power brokers. Aquarion Water Company, St. Vincent's and Bridgeport hospitals, Harbor Yard Sports and Entertainment and the Bridgeport and Port Jefferson Steamboat Company all gave $14,000. United Illuminating -- whose post-hurricane recovery efforts Finch criticized -- donated $10,000 to the cause.

"We believe in Bridgeport. We believe in giving children a better education option," UI spokesman Michael West said. "It's part of what we thought is our civic responsibility."

West said the request for the contribution was made a month ago, long before Hurricane Sandy was forecast, and the money comes from a corporate fund used for such purposes, not from ratepayers.

Bloomberg also gave $20,000 to Residents for a Better Bridgeport.

Finch Chief of Staff Adam Wood -- who pitched in $66 for Residents for a Better Bridgeport's web domain -- noted in contrast opponents of the appointed board are mainly supported by labor unions.

"With respect to the folks who chose to support Residents for a Better Bridgeport, the Bridgeport Regional Business Council took a vote to support this effort early on and most people in the corporate community followed that lead. They have a stake in the community and improving outcomes for our children," Wood said.

The issue also has charter revision backers and opponents calling in outside reinforcements.

Two weeks ago, Sacramento, Calif., Mayor Kevin Johnson, a former NBA All-Star and husband to education reform movement lighting-rod Michelle Rhee, appeared at Tisdale School to show support for an appointed school board that could be held accountable. And on Sunday night, the Rev. Al Sharpton is scheduled to appear at the Mt. Aery Baptist Church to warn against anything that would take away the public's right to vote.

More than 95 percent of the nation's 15,000 school districts have locally elected school boards. Mayoral-controlled districts are most often found in large urban school districts like Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, and Detroit.

In Connecticut, only New Haven has a school board completely appointed by the mayor. Hartford has had a board with four elected members and five appointed by the mayor.

And neither New Haven or Hartford have much better school systems to show for it, argues city teacher Rob Traber. What the district needs, he said, are smaller classes and more resources, not appointed school boards that answer to a mayor.

State Rep. Jack Hennessey, D-Bridgeport, suggested a weak Republican party in the city is one reason the question is even being raised. For years, he said, Bridgeport has essentially been a one-party town until the Working Families Party started winning seats -- it is now up to three -- on the school board. He said it scared some Democrats not used to opposition.

Hennessey said he prefers a vibrant school board that asks tough questions -- like where the money is going -- but also wants to see them get down to the business of improving schools, something that wasn't happening with the previous elected school board.

Working Families Party Executive Director Lindsay Farrell said the charter change will discourage, not encourage, parental involvement in education. She also suggests the motive behind the charter change has less to do with her party than with control over the district's $224 million annual operating budget.

"It's a lot of money," Farrell said.

Jessica Martinez, a Bridgeport parent who supports the charter change, said she doesn't know about the money. She is counting on an appointed school board to do a far better job than an elected school board.

She started to see improvement after the state came in and replaced the board with appointed members last year. After the state Supreme Court reversed that decision and an elected school board was back in place in September, Martinez said the first couple of meetings sealed her decision.

"Those meetings had nothing to do with my child, but were about lawsuits and who is sitting at the table," she said "I don't want to hear that. I want to know: What is your plan for my child? What's your plan for my nephew? I don't trust them," she said.

Bridgeport's plan, said Viteritti, the education expert and author, seems to have plenty of checks in place.

First off, the mayoral appointees are subject to City Council approval. In addition, appointed members have fixed four-year terms, giving them more independence than if they were simply to serve at the pleasure of the mayor. Beyond that, the plan doesn't give the mayor direct control over the selection of the superintendent.

All that detracts from mayoral power, said Viteritti.

What mayoral control will do, said Viteritti, is serve as motivation for the mayor to pay more attention, and invest more money in the schools. In New York City, the change to an appointed board meant an increase of more than 50 percent in city funding for schools, Viteritti said.

He also doesn't buy the argument that the public is giving up its right to vote.

"In some ways you can argue it's more Democratic," he said. "You might not elect school board members, but you elect the mayor and city council, and the fact of matter is in most places there is a larger percentage of people who vote for mayor."

In Bridgeport's special school board election in September, for example, turnout was just 5.5 percent of registered voters.

Jim Finley, executive director of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, is taking notes on the Bridgeport controversy. His organization has no dog in the fight, but he suggested the outcome could affect education policy in other Connecticut municipalities.

"It's frustrating for chief elected and municipal officials in most towns," Finley said. "Hartford and New Haven are the two notable exceptions, where the mayors play a lead role in appointing the school board and really have some authority over schools. In most communities in Connecticut, that's not the case. And on average it's about 69 percent of a municipal budget, but the chief elected official really has little say over that."

Malloy, during a visit to Bridgeport Saturday to promote aid for victims of Hurricane Sandy, said the charter decision is up to the city's voters.

"That's not a battle that I'm fighting. We have both systems in Connecticut," Malloy said. "It's ultimately a decision for the people of Bridgeport to make."

Some say the question could very well turn out to be a referendum on Finch, who has worked to gain board control for some time. Gary Rose, head of Sacred Heart University's political science department, said Finch is not on the ballot, but has staked much of his own political capital on passage of the changes.

"Whether they want to give him broader powers or not I think is in fact a statement about how the voters will feel," Rose said. "This is really his initiative -- and I think that in many ways it's him that's really what this vote is about."

But Rev. Kevin Ginyard, a local pastor and president of the Interdenominational Ministerial Alliance, said his beef is not with Finch.

"I personally have a lot of respect for Mayor Finch," Ginyard said. "This is not an anti-Finch campaign; but I can simply not allow any one person to have that kind of power over an issue in our society that is so important."

He called the charter question distasteful and vulgar.

"You are taking away the right of a free people to make their own decision about their future and their community," Ginyard said.